ASA Rule Changes

[IRISHMAFIA]

All effective January 1, 2004 unless otherwise noted.

Men's Major SP bases moved to 80' and fences "should" be 325' for championship

Approved double first base for all divisions of play (2005)

Mandate NOCSAE approved face mask/guard on all batting helmets used in all JO Fastpitch game (2005)

Approved the term "Flex" player to replace that of "DEFO"

Set HR limits for four levels of Senior SP with excess resulting in an out

Added the following concerning men's FP only:
J. Pushing off and dragging the pivot foot, or having the toes of the pivot foot in the downward direction, is required.

Added the following concerning 16" SP only:
When a batter intentionally hits a pitched ball that first strikes the ground or home plate to prevent the catcher from executing a pick-off attempt. Effect: Ball dead, and the batter called out.

Added to Rule 8.4:
G. All Men's Slow Pitch will be permitted to steal. (This does not apply to Master's and Senior Play)

Removed the words: "or not about to receive a thrown ball to read: "when a fielder not inpossession of the ball or not in the act of fielding a batted ball, impedes the progress of a runner or batter-runner that is legally running bases." IOW, the defender must have possession of the ball to legally block a runner's basepath. Any other action, or lack of, could constitute obstruction.

[Rick Vietti]

Mike - Thanks for the timely updates.

What confounds me is that they do not fix things that are broken.

I can see where base stealing is exciting and adds another dimension to the game but in a one man system this will be a nightmare.

[Dakota]

It can be (and probably will be in many cases) mitigated by local rules. If your local leagues play with one umpire (all around here do), then lobby to have the league adopt a local "no stealing" rule.

[BigUmpJohn]

Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
Removed the words: "or not about to receive a thrown ball to read: "when a fielder not inpossession of the ball or not in the act of fielding a batted ball, impedes the progress of a runner or batter-runner that is legally running bases." IOW, the defender must have possession of the ball to legally block a runner's basepath. Any other action, or lack of, could constitute obstruction.

Good. No more thinking about where the ball is in relation to the runner. Have the ball or get out of the way. Thanks, Mike, for the updates.

[Rick Vietti]

Our local leagues will probably knock it out.

I do like the clarification on obstruction.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by Rick Vietti
Mike - Thanks for the timely updates.

What confounds me is that they do not fix things that are broken.

I can see where base stealing is exciting and adds another dimension to the game but in a one man system this will be a nightmare.

Remember, this is for Championship Play. Local leagues did not utilize the rule.

I have already called the county office which runs our program and suggested that they offer the rule to the upper level league. Offer it to them and see if they want to give it a shot. You never know, it may work.

On the other hand, this will make the "slugs" get out from behind the plate.

[Dakota]

Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
On the other hand, this will make the "slugs" get out from behind the plate.

Not necessarily. We have a few "slugs" calling JO fastpitch, and stealing has been legal there forever. They have no problem "seeing" the swipe tag at 2nd from behind the catcher!

[greymule]

I'd love to see stealing in the local SP leagues. What a way to breathe life into that game!

However, I'd be amazed if any of our local leagues go along with it. Too bad.

[Steve M]

Mike,
Thanks for the update. Now, if I'm reading this right, this means that pretty much anything goes in men's FP. No legal crow hops, but now the leap is legal (as long as the toes are pointed down) - right? And with the double base being approved - is mandated coming? Many of the fields in Pa still do not have the double base.

Steve M

[CecilOne]

Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
I have already called the county office which runs our program and suggested that they offer the rule to the upper level league. Offer it to them and see if they want to give it a shot. You never know, it may work.

[/B]

As long as it is clearly defined and the players remember which league they are in on which night.

Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
On the other hand, this will make the "slugs" get out from behind the plate.
[/B]

What an optimist!

[greymule]

"About to receive" meant "ball is between fielder and runner." With the rule change, if a runner crashes a catcher who is juggling the ball or picking up the ball (ball between fielder and runner), is that no longer a violation? (Let's acknowledge that a deliberate, dirty play falls into its own category.)

[Dakota]

Originally posted by greymule
"About to receive" meant "ball is between fielder and runner." With the rule change, if a runner crashes a catcher who is juggling the ball or picking up the ball (ball between fielder and runner), is that no longer a violation? (Let's acknowledge that a deliberate, dirty play falls into its own category.)

I would hope ASA would add a case play or two and explain their interp in the POEs. The one (and only, IMO) good thing about the ASA "about to receive" rule is that it applied to more than just a straightforward throw and catch timing vs the approaching runner. It dealt with bobbled balls, etc., since the ball was clearly closer to the fielder than the runner if the fielder was trying to maintain control.

If we follow the strict (assumed) letter of the new rule, if the fielder does not have possession, then the fielder would be guilty of obstruction. If that's the way ASA wants it called, fine, but it will definitely require some adjustments by the defense.

International rules will provide an established base of interps, but most ASA umpires do not call (or know) the international rules and applications of the rules.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by Steve M
Mike,
Thanks for the update. Now, if I'm reading this right, this means that pretty much anything goes in men's FP. No legal crow hops, but now the leap is legal (as long as the toes are pointed down) - right? And with the double base being approved - is mandated coming? Many of the fields in Pa still do not have the double base.

Steve M

The change was approved to mandate the double first base.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by Dakota

I would hope ASA would add a case play or two and explain their interp in the POEs. The one (and only, IMO) good thing about the ASA "about to receive" rule is that it applied to more than just a straightforward throw and catch timing vs the approaching runner. It dealt with bobbled balls, etc., since the ball was clearly closer to the fielder than the runner if the fielder was trying to maintain control.

If we follow the strict (assumed) letter of the new rule, if the fielder does not have possession, then the fielder would be guilty of obstruction. If that's the way ASA wants it called, fine, but it will definitely require some adjustments by the defense.

International rules will provide an established base of interps, but most ASA umpires do not call (or know) the international rules and applications of the rules.

I think y'all are making this more difficult than necessary.

All the change did was protect the runner when there was no valid play to be made by the defense. I don't think the umpire needs to establish possession before making a call, you'll know it when you see it. If the ball gets inside the glove and then comes out when an attempt is made to tag the runner, that's probably a dropped ball, not obstruction.

If the defender doesn't have a play, they shouldn't be in the basepath to start.

[Dakota]

Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
I think y'all are making this more difficult than necessary

No doubt you are right. Just a bit of uncertainty with the change, I suppose. Thanks for the clarification.

BTW, Mike,

y'all

Yeeeeee Haaaaa!